[ ukko / epic / a / b / coco / fap / fit / g / hikky / int / m / meta / nom / p / tv / upi / x / yolo ][My] [Replied] [Hidden] [Watched] - [WT] [NT 0] [Home] [Preferences]
MÖLLÖLAUTA :D

[Return]
Posting mode: Reply
Name
Subject
Message
File
Embed
  • Maximum file size allowed is 25MB
  • Images greater than 250x250 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • View catalog

File 17450402103919634.gif - (3.36 MB, 402x264, Bodyweight-Bicep-Hammer-Curl.gif)
213058
No, the U.S. Army no longer uses battle axes as a primary weapon on the modern battlefield. While they may be part of a tool kit for certain tasks like clearing brush or building fortifications, they are not a standard piece of equipment for infantry or other combat roles.
Here's why:
Evolution of Warfare:
The advent of firearms and modern weaponry, including artillery and missiles, has rendered battle axes obsolete in direct combat scenarios.
Specialized Roles:
Some units, like Special Forces, might still use hatchets or tomahawks for specific tasks, like breaching doors or clearing obstacles.
Logistical Considerations:
The U.S. military prioritizes efficiency and standardization. A large, complex military supply chain would not readily support a shift to the use of battle axes, even for a limited number of units.
Image and Psychology:
While the image of a soldier wielding an axe can be intimidating, it is unlikely to have a significant impact on a modern battlefield. The psychology of combat has shifted towards precision and distanc
Expand all images

[Return] [Catalog] 0 Replies • Page 5 • Opened 2 times
Reason

[ ukko / epic / a / b / coco / fap / fit / g / hikky / int / m / meta / nom / p / tv / upi / x / yolo ]